the whole torture thing

.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

george orwell

as i sit here and watch the torture debate rage back and forth among people who have not the slightest clue as to what they're talking about, three questions seem to keep coming up:

1. what, exactly, constitutes torture;

2. under what circumstances, if any, is torture ever morally justified; and

3. is it ever even effective?

and if you think i'm even gonna try to answer these questions in this post, you're dead wrong, because when it comes to this subject, i have no idea what i'm talking about either--but unlike everybody else, i'm at least willing to admit it.

and that's my point: fuck the politicians, the public and the half-ass opinions they rode in on--effective, efficient intelligence-gathering is best left to the experts, and that's where this matter should've stayed.

see, every nation has two sides: (1) the high-minded face it puts forth to the world; and (2) the dark underside that actually gets shit done. and it's generally understood--by every nation but us, apparently--that that's the way it must be, and the less talked-about, the better.

am i saying i "condone" torture? no. what i'm saying is, as a soft, sheltered american civilian, i haven't clue one as to what it really takes to keep us safe in our beds each night--and neither do you. as such, i give about as much credibility to someone who says they'd never under any circumstances condone torture as i do to someone who makes the same claim about abortion. because, seriously, folks--it's a rough, tough world out there, and if you really think omelettes get made without breaking a few eggs, then you need to wake up and smell the coffee.

then, you might ask, am i saying our intelligence services should be allowed carte blanche in terms of how they operate? again, no--there should be oversight, but it should be managed discreetly and at the highest levels of government, and not be made a political football to be kicked about in the public arena as is being currently done.

having said all that--and putting aside for the moment the above three questions--i'll now give you my thoughts on this mess:

1. the bush administration was wrong. i believe the CIA was probably pushed into waterboarding those guys by a bush administration so desperate to tie al qaeda to iraq that they'd take any link they could get by any means, no matter how faulty it might turn out to be later. and i'll further bet the CIA knew at the time "garbage in, garbage out," but couldn't get anybody in power at the time to listen.

2. the obama administration is wrong. i further believe that a dangerously naive new president came into office believing his own campaign bullshit, and, ignoring the fundamental truths i outlined above, piously and mindlessly turned on his (and our) intelligence watchdogs--who, i'm gratified to see, then apparently bit him in the ass and clued him in as to what's really up (what makes me think this? simple: read this--oh, and while you're at it, this).

3. nancy pelosi is an idiot. i'd have respected her more (fine--detested her less) had she had the cojones to forego the craven ass-covering and just say, "yeah, i signed off on the waterboarding because i thought the safety of the country was at stake. judgment call--sue me."

bottom line: as we fall on our collective knees, wailing and rending our garments over laughably minor crap like abu ghraib, guantanamo and a little waterboarding in a futile plea to win the world's forgiveness--not understanding that such appeasement is always perceived, by enemies and friends alike, as weakness--i watch the middle east solidify in its hatred and contempt for the west, north korea starve its people in order to feed its million-man army, russia rattle its newly-sharpened sabers, israel prepare to decimate iran, and the taliban overrun nuclear-armed pakistan.

and me? i dunno whether to laugh, cry or move to australia.